> >Coud you please specify where you saw a band-limitation to AM Signals? > > > >73 = Best Regards, > >-Geoff/W5OMR
> Certainly, > > If you look at the page http://www.arrl.org/announce/bandwidth.html > > then look at the proposed ยง 97.305 Authorized emission types. First look > at the table in (e), then look at (f) (1) The 3 kHz maximum bandwidth does > not apply to double-sideband amplitude-modulated phone A3E emissions which > are limited to --26 dB bandwidths of 9 kHz. > > Everywhere you see a (1) in the table under (e) AM is limited to 9KHz > bandwidth. Just wondering if this is ok with you guys? > > 73, > Mark N5RFX But, Mark... given the verbiage of: There are certain incumbent amateur operations that should be allowed to continue, though they may not comply with the above-referenced bandwidth limitations. Principal among these is double-sideband AM, which has a significant following in the Amateur community. The proposed rules accommodate continued DSB-AM operation in the high-frequency bands without additional restriction. ...would you agree that quite possibly the tabled information might be incorrect? And, just for the sake of me knowing, why would you (or ANY AM'er for that matter want to have audio that was 9kc wide? Commercial AM Broadcast stations are spaced at 10kc. What's wrong with 9kc? The 'typical' Amateur AM signal is onlyaround 6kc wide, anyway. I can say that I have heard SSB stations that were wider. BECAUSE of them, I believe, there needs to be some limits. Although, Jim has a point; We're non-professionals. We're Amatuers. We're experimenters and tinkerers. I'm thinking; "Why -can't- we experiment with a mode in it's properly designated area on the band? Digital signals, at the top of the CW bands, where there's typically not much CW usage? 9kc? I -wish- I could get my highs up to 3.5kc ;-) 73 = Best Regards, -Geoff/W5OMR
